Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Transparency in data visualization is an essential ingredient for scientific communication. The traditional approach of visualizing continuous quantitative data solely in the form of summary statistics (i.e., measures of central tendency and dispersion) has repeatedly been criticized for not revealing the underlying raw data distribution. Remarkably, however, systematic and easy-to-use solutions for raw data visualization using the most commonly reported statistical software package for data analysis, IBM SPSS Statistics, are missing. Here, a comprehensive collection of more than 100 SPSS syntax files and an SPSS dataset template is presented and made freely available that allow the creation of transparent graphs for one-sample designs, for one- and two-factorial between-subject designs, for selected one- and two-factorial within-subject designs as well as for selected two-factorial mixed designs and, with some creativity, even beyond (e.g., three-factorial mixed-designs). Depending on graph type (e.g., pure dot plot, box plot, and line plot), raw data can be displayed along with standard measures of central tendency (arithmetic mean and median) and dispersion (95% CI and SD). The free-to-use syntax can also be modified to match with individual needs. A variety of example applications of syntax are illustrated in a tutorial-like fashion along with fictitious datasets accompanying this contribution. The syntax collection is hoped to provide researchers, students, teachers, and others working with SPSS a valuable tool to move towards more transparency in data visualization.
General information: The data sets contain information on how often materials of studies available through GESIS: Data Archive for the Social Sciences were downloaded and/or ordered through one of the archive´s plattforms/services between 2004 and 2017.
Sources and plattforms: Study materials are accessible through various GESIS plattforms and services: Data Catalogue (DBK), histat, datorium, data service (and others).
Years available: - Data Catalogue: 2012-2017 - data service: 2006-2017 - datorium: 2014-2017 - histat: 2004-2017
Data sets: Data set ZA6899_Datasets_only_all_sources contains information on how often data files such as those with dta- (Stata) or sav- (SPSS) extension have been downloaded. Identification of data files is handled semi-automatically (depending on the plattform/serice). Multiple downloads of one file by the same user (identified through IP-address or username for registered users) on the same days are only counted as one download.
Data set ZA6899_Doc_and_Data_all_sources contains information on how often study materials have been downloaded. Multiple downloads of any file of the same study by the same user (identified through IP-address or username for registered users) on the same days are only counted as one download.
Both data sets are available in three formats: csv (quoted, semicolon-separated), dta (Stata v13, labeled) and sav (SPSS, labeled). All formats contain identical information.
Variables: Variables/columns in both data sets are identical. za_nr ´Archive study number´ version ´GESIS Archiv Version´ doi ´Digital Object Identifier´ StudyNo ´Study number of respective study´ Title ´English study title´ Title_DE ´German study title´ Access ´Access category (0, A, B, C, D, E)´ PubYear ´Publication year of last version of the study´ inZACAT ´Study is currently also available via ZACAT´ inHISTAT ´Study is currently also available via HISTAT´ inDownloads ´There are currently data files available for download for this study in DBK or datorium´ Total ´All downloads combined´ downloads_2004 ´downloads/orders from all sources combined in 2004´ [up to ...] downloads_2017 ´downloads/orders from all sources combined in 2017´ d_2004_dbk ´downloads from source dbk in 2004´ [up to ...] d_2017_dbk ´downloads from source dbk in 2017´ d_2004_histat ´downloads from source histat in 2004´ [up to ...] d_2017_histat ´downloads from source histat in 2017´ d_2004_dataservice ´downloads/orders from source dataservice in 2004´ [up to ...] d_2017_dataservice ´downloads/orders from source dataservice in 2017´
More information is available within the codebook.
analyze the current population survey (cps) annual social and economic supplement (asec) with r the annual march cps-asec has been supplying the statistics for the census bureau's report on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage since 1948. wow. the us census bureau and the bureau of labor statistics ( bls) tag-team on this one. until the american community survey (acs) hit the scene in the early aughts (2000s), the current population survey had the largest sample size of all the annual general demographic data sets outside of the decennial census - about two hundred thousand respondents. this provides enough sample to conduct state- and a few large metro area-level analyses. your sample size will vanish if you start investigating subgroups b y state - consider pooling multiple years. county-level is a no-no. despite the american community survey's larger size, the cps-asec contains many more variables related to employment, sources of income, and insurance - and can be trended back to harry truman's presidency. aside from questions specifically asked about an annual experience (like income), many of the questions in this march data set should be t reated as point-in-time statistics. cps-asec generalizes to the united states non-institutional, non-active duty military population. the national bureau of economic research (nber) provides sas, spss, and stata importation scripts to create a rectangular file (rectangular data means only person-level records; household- and family-level information gets attached to each person). to import these files into r, the parse.SAScii function uses nber's sas code to determine how to import the fixed-width file, then RSQLite to put everything into a schnazzy database. you can try reading through the nber march 2012 sas importation code yourself, but it's a bit of a proc freak show. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2005-2012 asec - download all microdata.R down load the fixed-width file containing household, family, and person records import by separating this file into three tables, then merge 'em together at the person-level download the fixed-width file containing the person-level replicate weights merge the rectangular person-level file with the replicate weights, then store it in a sql database create a new variable - one - in the data table 2012 asec - analysis examples.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' progr am create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights perform a boatload of analysis examples replicate census estimates - 2011.R connect to the sql database created by the 'download all microdata' program create the complex sample survey object, using the replicate weights match the sas output shown in the png file below 2011 asec replicate weight sas output.png statistic and standard error generated from the replicate-weighted example sas script contained in this census-provided person replicate weights usage instructions document. click here to view these three scripts for more detail about the current population survey - annual social and economic supplement (cps-asec), visit: the census bureau's current population survey page the bureau of labor statistics' current population survey page the current population survey's wikipedia article notes: interviews are conducted in march about experiences during the previous year. the file labeled 2012 includes information (income, work experience, health insurance) pertaining to 2011. when you use the current populat ion survey to talk about america, subract a year from the data file name. as of the 2010 file (the interview focusing on america during 2009), the cps-asec contains exciting new medical out-of-pocket spending variables most useful for supplemental (medical spending-adjusted) poverty research. confidential to sas, spss, stata, sudaan users: why are you still rubbing two sticks together after we've invented the butane lighter? time to transition to r. :D
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This dataset is about books. It has 2 rows and is filtered where the book is Data analysis with SPSS : a first course in applied statistics. It features 7 columns including author, publication date, language, and book publisher.
This site contains a series of SPSS assignments, which will take you from the basics of opening data files to the complexities of creating a professional conference poster. These assignments use real data that were collected at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Each assignment has two parts: the first includes step-by-step instructions and the second provides extra practice. In later assignments, you will re-use the skills you learned in earlier assignments. After completing these assignments, you will be better prepared for the rigors of the workplace and for graduate-level research.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The present data were used to through the LPM the effect of CLI in the acquisition of L3 English past perfect, present progressive, and present perfect tenses by L1 Kirundi-L2 French bilinguals. The subtractive language groups design was used: One trilingual (L1 Kirundi-L2 French-L3 English learners) group was compared to two bilingual (L1 Kirundi-L2 English and L1 French-L2 English learners) groups in order to derive which previously acquired language was driving CLI among L3 learners. Each language group had 30 learners distributed in four proficiency groups, namely the pre-intermediate group (6 participants), lower-intermediate group (7 participants), upper-intermediate group (11 participants), and advanced group (6 participants). Therefore, there were two independent variables (language group and proficiency group) and three continuous dependent variables which were the participants' scores on the three target structures, namely the past perfect, present progressive, and present perfect tenses.
The data were used to test the following predictions:
With regard to the past perfect tense (L1=L2=L3), learners of L3 English with a background knowledge in L1 Kirundi and L2 French are likely to have no difficulty in the acquisition of the said tense in English regardless of their English proficiency level; i.e. even lower proficiency learners will perform well on that tense. However, higher proficiency learners may make most correct use of this tense.
With regard to the present progressive tense (L1≠L3≠L2), we can predict that all the three language groups, i.e. L1 Kirundi, L1 French and L3 groups, will face difficulties in their performance on this tense. In other words, none of the previously acquired languages (neither L1 Kirundi, nor L2 French) is expected to significantly affect the performance of L3ers on the said tense. Lower proficiency learners are predicted to face most difficulty on the tense.
With regard to the present perfect tense (L3=L2≠L1), we can predict that the L3 group will perform similarly as the L1 French group, while the two groups are likely to outperform the L1 Kirundi group. This implies that facilitative CLI is expected from L2 French in the L3 group.
Considering the present research scenarios for the past perfect (L1=L2=L3), present perfect (L1=L3≠L2), and present progressive (L1≠L2≠L3) tenses, we predict CLI where L3 learners are expected to acquire the past perfect earlier than the present perfect, and the present perfect earlier than the present progressive. In other words, their performance on the past perfect tense should be significantly higher than that on the present perfect while their score on the present perfect is expected to be significantly higher than that on the present progressive.
Data were elicited through the grammaticality judgment task, and the raw data analyzed in the SPSS software using descriptive statistics, MANOVA, post-hoc comparisons, and independent samples t-tests.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This dataset is about book subjects. It has 2 rows and is filtered where the books is SPSS for Windows step by step : a simple guide and reference, 16.0 update. It features 10 columns including number of authors, number of books, earliest publication date, and latest publication date.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
GENERAL INFORMATION
Title of Dataset: A dataset from a survey investigating disciplinary differences in data citation
Date of data collection: January to March 2022
Collection instrument: SurveyMonkey
Funding: Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION
Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: These data are available under a CC BY 4.0 license
Links to publications that cite or use the data:
Gregory, K., Ninkov, A., Ripp, C., Peters, I., & Haustein, S. (2022). Surveying practices of data citation and reuse across disciplines. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Granada, Spain. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.6951437
Gregory, K., Ninkov, A., Ripp, C., Roblin, E., Peters, I., & Haustein, S. (2023). Tracing data: A survey investigating disciplinary differences in data citation. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7555266
DATA & FILE OVERVIEW
File List
Filename: MDCDatacitationReuse2021Codebookv2.pdf Codebook
Filename: MDCDataCitationReuse2021surveydatav2.csv Dataset format in csv
Filename: MDCDataCitationReuse2021surveydatav2.sav Dataset format in SPSS
Filename: MDCDataCitationReuseSurvey2021QNR.pdf Questionnaire
Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package: Open ended questions asked to respondents
METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION
Description of methods used for collection/generation of data:
The development of the questionnaire (Gregory et al., 2022) was centered around the creation of two main branches of questions for the primary groups of interest in our study: researchers that reuse data (33 questions in total) and researchers that do not reuse data (16 questions in total). The population of interest for this survey consists of researchers from all disciplines and countries, sampled from the corresponding authors of papers indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) between 2016 and 2020.
Received 3,632 responses, 2,509 of which were completed, representing a completion rate of 68.6%. Incomplete responses were excluded from the dataset. The final total contains 2,492 complete responses and an uncorrected response rate of 1.57%. Controlling for invalid emails, bounced emails and opt-outs (n=5,201) produced a response rate of 1.62%, similar to surveys using comparable recruitment methods (Gregory et al., 2020).
Methods for processing the data:
Results were downloaded from SurveyMonkey in CSV format and were prepared for analysis using Excel and SPSS by recoding ordinal and multiple choice questions and by removing missing values.
Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data:
The dataset is provided in SPSS format, which requires IBM SPSS Statistics. The dataset is also available in a coded format in CSV. The Codebook is required to interpret to values.
DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: MDCDataCitationReuse2021surveydata
Number of variables: 95
Number of cases/rows: 2,492
Missing data codes: 999 Not asked
Refer to MDCDatacitationReuse2021Codebook.pdf for detailed variable information.
The OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) surveys collected data on students’ performances in reading, mathematics and science, as well as contextual information on students’ background, home characteristics and school factors which could influence performance. This publication includes detailed information on how to analyse the PISA data, enabling researchers to both reproduce the initial results and to undertake further analyses. In addition to the inclusion of the necessary techniques, the manual also includes a detailed account of the PISA 2006 database and worked examples providing full syntax in SPSS.
https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4988https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4988
Citizen Science (CS) projects play a crucial role in engaging citizens in conservation efforts. While implicitly mostly considered as an outcome of CS participation, citizens may also have a certain attitude toward engagement in CS when starting to participate in a CS project. Moreover, there is a lack of CS studies that consider changes over longer periods of time. Therefore, this research presents two-wave data from four field studies of a CS project about urban wildlife ecology using cross-lagged panel analyses. We investigated the influence of attitudes toward engagement in CS on self-related, ecology-related, and motivation-related outcomes. We found that positive attitudes toward engagement in CS at the beginning of the CS project had positive influences on participants’ psychological ownership and pride in their participation, their attitudes toward and enthusiasm about wildlife, and their internal and external motivation two months later. We discuss the implications for CS research and practice. Dataset for: Greving, H., Bruckermann, T., Schumann, A., Stillfried, M., Börner, K., Hagen, R., Kimmig, S. E., Brandt, M., & Kimmerle, J. (2023). Attitudes Toward Engagement in Citizen Science Increase Self-Related, Ecology-Related, and Motivation-Related Outcomes in an Urban Wildlife Project. BioScience, 73(3), 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biad003: Analysis script (SPSS format) used on the data of all field studies
Part 1 of the course will offer an introduction to SPSS and teach how to work with data saved in SPSS format. Part 2 will demonstrate how to work with SPSS syntax, how to create your own SPSS data files, and how to convert data in other formats to SPSS. Part 3 will teach how to append and merge SPSS files, demonstrate basic analytical procedures, and show how to work with SPSS graphics.
Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 (CC BY-NC 3.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
License information was derived automatically
In this study, 403 Chinese consumers generalizable to the broader population were surveyed on their motivations to shop for fashion apparel in both high street and e-commerce environments. Statistical analysis was undertaken through multiple T-Tests and MANOVA with the assistance of SPSS and G*Power.
To increase the profits of international brands, this paper presents the motivations of Chinese consumers to engage in fashion retail, building upon established theory in hedonic and utilitarian motivations. With China set to capture over 24% of the $212 billion fashion market, international brands need to understand the unique motivations of Chinese consumers in order to capitalise on the market. However, the motivations of Chinese people to engage in fashion retail are as yet undefined, limiting the ability for international fashion retailers to operate with prosperity in the Chinese market.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This is raw and analysis data for empirical study, entitled entitled “Integrating Multidimensional Dependability with the Technology Acceptance Model: A Study of Adoption of Cloud Computing at the Organizational Level”. This study investigated how perceived dependability affects user acceptance by integrating perceived dependability with the technology acceptance model in the context of cloud computing. In this study, perceived dependability was treated as a multi-dimensional variable and conceptualized as a second-order construct. A total of 216 samples (organizational managers) were analyzed using the structural equation modeling. IBM SPSS AMOS 23 tool was used for data analysis. For file 1 (1. Survey in Korean), this is a Korean version. If researchers want a English version, they can use "Appendix A." in our original article. For file 2 (2. DATASET (216)), researchers can use this for their own analysis contexts. This spss file also contains the values obtained from item parceling technique this study used. For other files (file 3, 4, 5, 6), they are the results of using Excel to calculate CR and AVE values. This data is valuable because no other research have empirically considered the multidimensional approach to dependability. These empirical data can provide academic researchers and businesses with insights on organizational level adoption of cloud computing.
https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4988https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4988
Citizen Science (CS) projects play a crucial role in engaging citizens in conservation efforts. While implicitly mostly considered as an outcome of CS participation, citizens may also have a certain attitude toward engagement in CS when starting to participate in a CS project. Moreover, there is a lack of CS studies that consider changes over longer periods of time. Therefore, this research presents two-wave data from four field studies of a CS project about urban wildlife ecology using cross-lagged panel analyses. We investigated the influence of attitudes toward engagement in CS on self-related, ecology-related, and motivation-related outcomes. We found that positive attitudes toward engagement in CS at the beginning of the CS project had positive influences on participants’ psychological ownership and pride in their participation, their attitudes toward and enthusiasm about wildlife, and their internal and external motivation two months later. We discuss the implications for CS research and practice. Dataset for: Greving, H., Bruckermann, T., Schumann, A., Stillfried, M., Börner, K., Hagen, R., Kimmig, S. E., Brandt, M., & Kimmerle, J. (2023). Attitudes Toward Engagement in Citizen Science Increase Self-Related, Ecology-Related, and Motivation-Related Outcomes in an Urban Wildlife Project. BioScience, 73(3), 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biad003: Analysis script (SPSS Amos format) used for model 2 for all field studies
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
These two syntax files were used to convert the SPSS data output from the Qualtrics survey tool into the 17 cleansed and anonymised RAAAP-2 datasets form the 2019 international survey of research managers and administrators. The first creates and interim cleansed and anonymised datafile, the latter splits these into separate datasets to ensure anonymisation. Errata (16/6/23): v13 of the main Data Cleansing file has an error (two variables were missing value labels). This file has now been replaced with v14, and the Main Dataset has also been updated with the new data.
This dataset originates from a series of experimental studies titled “Tough on People, Tolerant to AI? Differential Effects of Human vs. AI Unfairness on Trust” The project investigates how individuals respond to unfair behavior (distributive, procedural, and interactional unfairness) enacted by artificial intelligence versus human agents, and how such behavior affects cognitive and affective trust.1 Experiment 1a: The Impact of AI vs. Human Distributive Unfairness on TrustOverview: This dataset comes from an experimental study aimed at examining how individuals respond in terms of cognitive and affective trust when distributive unfairness is enacted by either an artificial intelligence (AI) agent or a human decision-maker. Experiment 1a specifically focuses on the main effect of the “type of decision-maker” on trust.Data Generation and Processing: The data were collected through Credamo, an online survey platform. Initially, 98 responses were gathered from students at a university in China. Additional student participants were recruited via Credamo to supplement the sample. Attention check items were embedded in the questionnaire, and participants who failed were automatically excluded in real-time. Data collection continued until 202 valid responses were obtained. SPSS software was used for data cleaning and analysis.Data Structure and Format: The data file is named “Experiment1a.sav” and is in SPSS format. It contains 28 columns and 202 rows, where each row corresponds to one participant. Columns represent measured variables, including: grouping and randomization variables, one manipulation check item, four items measuring distributive fairness perception, six items on cognitive trust, five items on affective trust, three items for honesty checks, and four demographic variables (gender, age, education, and grade level). The final three columns contain computed means for distributive fairness, cognitive trust, and affective trust.Additional Information: No missing data are present. All variable names are labeled in English abbreviations to facilitate further analysis. The dataset can be directly opened in SPSS or exported to other formats.2 Experiment 1b: The Mediating Role of Perceived Ability and Benevolence (Distributive Unfairness)Overview: This dataset originates from an experimental study designed to replicate the findings of Experiment 1a and further examine the potential mediating role of perceived ability and perceived benevolence.Data Generation and Processing: Participants were recruited via the Credamo online platform. Attention check items were embedded in the survey to ensure data quality. Data were collected using a rolling recruitment method, with invalid responses removed in real time. A total of 228 valid responses were obtained.Data Structure and Format: The dataset is stored in a file named Experiment1b.sav in SPSS format and can be directly opened in SPSS software. It consists of 228 rows and 40 columns. Each row represents one participant’s data record, and each column corresponds to a different measured variable. Specifically, the dataset includes: random assignment and grouping variables; one manipulation check item; four items measuring perceived distributive fairness; six items on perceived ability; five items on perceived benevolence; six items on cognitive trust; five items on affective trust; three items for attention check; and three demographic variables (gender, age, and education). The last five columns contain the computed mean scores for perceived distributive fairness, ability, benevolence, cognitive trust, and affective trust.Additional Notes: There are no missing values in the dataset. All variables are labeled using standardized English abbreviations to facilitate reuse and secondary analysis. The file can be analyzed directly in SPSS or exported to other formats as needed.3 Experiment 2a: Differential Effects of AI vs. Human Procedural Unfairness on TrustOverview: This dataset originates from an experimental study aimed at examining whether individuals respond differently in terms of cognitive and affective trust when procedural unfairness is enacted by artificial intelligence versus human decision-makers. Experiment 2a focuses on the main effect of the decision agent on trust outcomes.Data Generation and Processing: Participants were recruited via the Credamo online survey platform from two universities located in different regions of China. A total of 227 responses were collected. After excluding those who failed the attention check items, 204 valid responses were retained for analysis. Data were processed and analyzed using SPSS software.Data Structure and Format: The dataset is stored in a file named Experiment2a.sav in SPSS format and can be directly opened in SPSS software. It contains 204 rows and 30 columns. Each row represents one participant’s response record, while each column corresponds to a specific variable. Variables include: random assignment and grouping; one manipulation check item; seven items measuring perceived procedural fairness; six items on cognitive trust; five items on affective trust; three attention check items; and three demographic variables (gender, age, and education). The final three columns contain computed average scores for procedural fairness, cognitive trust, and affective trust.Additional Notes: The dataset contains no missing values. All variables are labeled using standardized English abbreviations to facilitate reuse and secondary analysis. The file can be directly analyzed in SPSS or exported to other formats as needed.4 Experiment 2b: Mediating Role of Perceived Ability and Benevolence (Procedural Unfairness)Overview: This dataset comes from an experimental study designed to replicate the findings of Experiment 2a and to further examine the potential mediating roles of perceived ability and perceived benevolence in shaping trust responses under procedural unfairness.Data Generation and Processing: Participants were working adults recruited through the Credamo online platform. A rolling data collection strategy was used, where responses failing attention checks were excluded in real time. The final dataset includes 235 valid responses. All data were processed and analyzed using SPSS software.Data Structure and Format: The dataset is stored in a file named Experiment2b.sav, which is in SPSS format and can be directly opened using SPSS software. It contains 235 rows and 43 columns. Each row corresponds to a single participant, and each column represents a specific measured variable. These include: random assignment and group labels; one manipulation check item; seven items measuring procedural fairness; six items for perceived ability; five items for perceived benevolence; six items for cognitive trust; five items for affective trust; three attention check items; and three demographic variables (gender, age, education). The final five columns contain the computed average scores for procedural fairness, perceived ability, perceived benevolence, cognitive trust, and affective trust.Additional Notes: There are no missing values in the dataset. All variables are labeled using standardized English abbreviations to support future reuse and secondary analysis. The dataset can be directly analyzed in SPSS and easily converted into other formats if needed.5 Experiment 3a: Effects of AI vs. Human Interactional Unfairness on TrustOverview: This dataset comes from an experimental study that investigates how interactional unfairness, when enacted by either artificial intelligence or human decision-makers, influences individuals’ cognitive and affective trust. Experiment 3a focuses on the main effect of the “decision-maker type” under interactional unfairness conditions.Data Generation and Processing: Participants were college students recruited from two universities in different regions of China through the Credamo survey platform. After excluding responses that failed attention checks, a total of 203 valid cases were retained from an initial pool of 223 responses. All data were processed and analyzed using SPSS software.Data Structure and Format: The dataset is stored in the file named Experiment3a.sav, in SPSS format and compatible with SPSS software. It contains 203 rows and 27 columns. Each row represents a single participant, while each column corresponds to a specific measured variable. These include: random assignment and condition labels; one manipulation check item; four items measuring interactional fairness perception; six items for cognitive trust; five items for affective trust; three attention check items; and three demographic variables (gender, age, education). The final three columns contain computed average scores for interactional fairness, cognitive trust, and affective trust.Additional Notes: There are no missing values in the dataset. All variable names are provided using standardized English abbreviations to facilitate secondary analysis. The data can be directly analyzed using SPSS and exported to other formats as needed.6 Experiment 3b: The Mediating Role of Perceived Ability and Benevolence (Interactional Unfairness)Overview: This dataset comes from an experimental study designed to replicate the findings of Experiment 3a and further examine the potential mediating roles of perceived ability and perceived benevolence under conditions of interactional unfairness.Data Generation and Processing: Participants were working adults recruited via the Credamo platform. Attention check questions were embedded in the survey, and responses that failed these checks were excluded in real time. Data collection proceeded in a rolling manner until a total of 227 valid responses were obtained. All data were processed and analyzed using SPSS software.Data Structure and Format: The dataset is stored in the file named Experiment3b.sav, in SPSS format and compatible with SPSS software. It includes 227 rows and
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This zip file contains data files for 3 activities described in the accompanying PPT slides 1. an excel spreadsheet for analysing gain scores in a 2 group, 2 times data array. this activity requires access to –https://campbellcollaboration.org/research-resources/effect-size-calculator.html to calculate effect size.2. an AMOS path model and SPSS data set for an autoregressive, bivariate path model with cross-lagging. This activity is related to the following article: Brown, G. T. L., & Marshall, J. C. (2012). The impact of training students how to write introductions for academic essays: An exploratory, longitudinal study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(6), 653-670. doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.5632773. an AMOS latent curve model and SPSS data set for a 3-time latent factor model with an interaction mixed model that uses GPA as a predictor of the LCM start and slope or change factors. This activity makes use of data reported previously and a published data analysis case: Peterson, E. R., Brown, G. T. L., & Jun, M. C. (2015). Achievement emotions in higher education: A diary study exploring emotions across an assessment event. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 82-96. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.05.002andBrown, G. T. L., & Peterson, E. R. (2018). Evaluating repeated diary study responses: Latent curve modeling. In SAGE Research Methods Cases Part 2. Retrieved from http://methods.sagepub.com/case/evaluating-repeated-diary-study-responses-latent-curve-modeling doi:10.4135/9781526431592
The article includes four studies plus one study in the discussion of Study 4 (named Study 5 in the following) All analysis were conducted using STATA or SPSS PROCESS by Hayes All original data sets including the respective scripts are saved as: Study 1: Original data set: Precommitment_Study 1.xlsx STATA script: Do-file_Study 1.txt Original survey conducted with Qualtrics: Qualtrics_survey_Study 1.pdf Study 2: Original data set: Precommitment_Study 2.xlsx STATA script: Do-file_Study 2.txt Original survey conducted with Qualtrics: Qualtrics_survey_Study 2.pdf Data set for SPSS Mediation analysis: Precommitment_mediation_Study 2 Study 3: Original data set: Precommitment_Study 3.xlsx STATA script: Do-file_Study 3.txt Original survey conducted with Qualtrics: Qualtrics_survey_Study 3.pdf Data set for SPSS Moderated mediation analysis: Precommitment_moderated_mediation_Study 3 Study 4: Original data set: Precommitment_Study 4.xlsx STATA script: Do-file_Study 4.txt Original survey conducted with Qualtrics: Qualtrics_survey_Study 4.pdf Data set for SPSS Moderated mediation analysis: Precommitment_moderated_mediation_Study 4 Study 5: Original data set: Precommitment_Study 5.xlsx STATA script: Do-file_Study 5.txt Original survey conducted with Qualtrics: Qualtrics_survey_Study 5.pdf
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
SPSS Data Sets Study 1 & 2(Glück, J. & Scherpf, A. (2022). Intelligence and wisdom: Age-Related Differences and Nonlinear Relationships. Manuscript submitted for publication (copy on file with author).
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The Comparative Political Economy Database (CPEDB) began at the Centre for Learning, Social Economy and Work (CLSEW) at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto (OISE/UT) as part of the Changing Workplaces in a Knowledge Economy (CWKE) project. This data base was initially conceived and developed by Dr. Wally Seccombe (independent scholar) and Dr. D.W. Livingstone (Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto). Seccombe has conducted internationally recognized historical research on evolving family structures of the labouring classes (A Millennium of Family Change: Feudalism to Capitalism in Northwestern Europe and Weathering the Storm: Working Class Families from the Industrial Revolution to the Fertility Decline). Livingstone has conducted decades of empirical research on class and labour relations. A major part of this research has used the Canadian Class Structure survey done at the Institute of Political Economy (IPE) at Carleton University in 1982 as a template for Canadian national surveys in 1998, 2004, 2010 and 2016, culminating in Tipping Point for Advanced Capitalism: Class, Class Consciousness and Activism in the ‘Knowledge Economy’ (https://fernwoodpublishing.ca/book/tipping-point-for-advanced-capitalism) and a publicly accessible data base including all five of these Canadian surveys (https://borealisdata.ca/dataverse/CanadaWorkLearningSurveys1998-2016). Seccombe and Livingstone have collaborated on a number of research studies that recognize the need to take account of expanded modes of production and reproduction. Both Seccombe and Livingstone are Research Associates of CLSEW at OISE/UT. The CPEDB Main File (an SPSS data file) covers the following areas (in order): demography, family/household, class/labour, government, electoral democracy, inequality (economic, political & gender), health, environment, internet, macro-economic and financial variables. In its present form, it contains annual data on 725 variables from 12 countries (alphabetically listed): Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and United States. A few of the variables date back to 1928, and the majority date from 1960 to 1990. Where these years are not covered in the source, a minority of variables begin with more recent years. All the variables end at the most recent available year (1999 to 2022). In the next version developed in 2025, the most recent years (2023 and 2024) will be added whenever they are present in the sources’ datasets. For researchers who are not using SPSS, refer to the Chart files for overviews, summaries and information on the dataset. For a current list of the variable names and their labels in the CPEDB data base, see the excel file: Outline of SPSS file Main CPEDB, Nov 6, 2023. At the end of each variable label in this file and the SPSS datafile, you will find the source of that variable in a bracket. If I have combined two variables from a given source, the bracket will begin with WS and then register the variables combined. In the 14 variables David created at the beginning of the Class Labour section, you will find DWL in these brackets with his description as to how it was derived. The CPEDB’s variables have been derived from many databases; the main ones are OECD (their Statistics and Family Databases), World Bank, ILO, IMF, WHO, WIID (World Income Inequality Database), OWID (Our World in Data), Parlgov (Parliaments and Governments Database), and V-Dem (Varieties of Democracy). The Institute for Political Economy at Carleton University is currently the main site for continuing refinement of the CPEDB. IPE Director Justin Paulson and other members are involved along with Seccombe and Livingstone in further development and safe storage of this updated database both at the IPE at Carleton and the UT dataverse. All those who explore the CPEDB are invited to share their perceptions of the entire database, or any of its sections, with Seccombe generally (wseccombe@sympatico.ca) and Livingstone for class/labour issues (davidlivingstone@utoronto.ca). They welcome any suggestions for additional variables together with their data sources. A new version CPEDB will be created in the spring of 2025 and installed as soon as the revision is completed. This revised version is intended to be a valuable resource for researchers in all of the included countries as well as Canada.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Transparency in data visualization is an essential ingredient for scientific communication. The traditional approach of visualizing continuous quantitative data solely in the form of summary statistics (i.e., measures of central tendency and dispersion) has repeatedly been criticized for not revealing the underlying raw data distribution. Remarkably, however, systematic and easy-to-use solutions for raw data visualization using the most commonly reported statistical software package for data analysis, IBM SPSS Statistics, are missing. Here, a comprehensive collection of more than 100 SPSS syntax files and an SPSS dataset template is presented and made freely available that allow the creation of transparent graphs for one-sample designs, for one- and two-factorial between-subject designs, for selected one- and two-factorial within-subject designs as well as for selected two-factorial mixed designs and, with some creativity, even beyond (e.g., three-factorial mixed-designs). Depending on graph type (e.g., pure dot plot, box plot, and line plot), raw data can be displayed along with standard measures of central tendency (arithmetic mean and median) and dispersion (95% CI and SD). The free-to-use syntax can also be modified to match with individual needs. A variety of example applications of syntax are illustrated in a tutorial-like fashion along with fictitious datasets accompanying this contribution. The syntax collection is hoped to provide researchers, students, teachers, and others working with SPSS a valuable tool to move towards more transparency in data visualization.